Stuart firefighters along with contingents from 25 other communities and dozens
of local men and women who served up food and coffee played out their parts in a
drama that ended sadly in the destruction of All Saints Church.

Expected words fell from lips of horrified onlookers: "Such a lovely church...
What a tragic loss... The artifacts can never be replaced... No other church like
it in the state of Iowa." All of these sentiments, even though heartfelt,
failed to catch the wrenching pathos gripping the hearts and souls of those who
watched the symbol of their spiritual lives consumed by angry flames.

But tears glistening in the fire's glare spoke of those tongueless secrets locked
away in so many memories: generations of baptisms, weddings, and funerals; men
who had served as altar boys, as well as their sons and grandsons; great-
grandfathers who dragged stones into place along the church walls; windows of
stained glass put there by dint and determination of devoted men and women. To
the parishioners, this was more than a building. All Saints was a place that
exuded an aura that elevated the most significant events of their lives, an
atmosphere that ran like a benevolent vine binding the dead, living, and those
yet to come. Speech is an imperfect instrument to convey such feelings.

Condolences raining in from every quarter demonstrate what we all knew--All
Saints was not just a Catholic church, but also a community landmark, a magnet
that attracted visitors from every state and foreign nations. The founders of
this town, riding the fortunes of the Rock Island Line, envisioned a community of
five or six thousand souls, a dream smashed by the railroad's transfer of the
division station to Valley Junction. Locked into that same dream, diocesan
planners committed to a church of grand design to serve Stuart and the
surrounding area. The railroad left us high and dry. The Catholic church left
us with an architectural gem, a beacon on the prairie, and a parish of less than
200 families charged with its maintenance and purpose, a mission of personal
sacrifice from which they have not wavered for 87 years.

Since 1908 we have seen the scourge of two world wars, Korea, Vietnam, and Desert
Storm, Prohibition, women's suffrage, the Great Depression, and man has set foot
on the moon. And throughout this long and arduous human saga, All Saints has
stood like a rock to soften the blows of personal tragedy for worshippers and as
a treasured monument to those of us who just felt good knowing it was still
there.

Our sense of loss has caused us to draw on anecdotes in an effort to keep the
church as it was. This is mine. In 1952 I talked to another kid in a Korean
staging area. He was from Mankato, Minnesota. He asked me where I was from. To
give him an idea, I was about ready to explain Stuart's proximity to Des Moines.
"Stuart," he said, "I've been there--visited the All Saints Church."

Black smoke belched from windows and doors when I arrived at the fire in the late
afternoon. A friend of years looked at me through doleful eyes and asked,
"Chuck, can you perform miracles? No," I said. "If I could I would." But
perhaps we can perform a miracle, you and I, the people of this community, by
insisting on nothing less than total restoration.

Like the phoenix, fabled bird of mythology, which burned and regenerated from its
own ashes, we can preserve our history by offering our energy and treasure until
this splendid, beautiful building rises again from its blackened walls.

Unaltered text of letter from Mark Becker, Building Committee Chairman, in response to January 9, 1996 letter to the editor. An abbreviated version appeared as letter to the editor in the Stuart Herald, January 17, 1996.

January 16, 1996

To: Friends of All Saints,

A truly senseless crime was committed on August 22...why did God allow it to happen? Was he sending us a message? Will we commit a crime of senseless destruction if we do not restore. My answer is no and I pray to God every morning at Mass for his inspiration as we study this restoration or building new project. I have toured many of the Cathedrals and Basilicas in Europe and many here in the U.S. and we truly had a church that fit in with most of them. I have toured St. Mark's in Venice which this was modeled after. And all of them are indeed amazing works of art. Probably none of them are supported by a parish of 160 families.

The information that we have so far is very vague and neither the insurance company or the construction company will give us concrete answers to our question. Neumann is trying to get a building job and the insurance company is trying to save money. And we are trying to get the best deal that we can for the parish.

I have talked to over 50 people who have been contributing goodly sums of money to the parish over the past 8 years that I have been here and basically they are saying that they have been paying through the nose for this church all their lives and that they do not wish to restore if it is going to cost them money. I have talked to very few who really do not care how much it costs to restore...they want restoration. And I have talked to a few who are interested in restoring if we can afford it.

Maintenance costs...were they exaggerated? $480,000 has been spent since Fr. Ryan came to this parish...and he has been very vocal that we should not restore. My job is to explain all details of restoration and building new to the best of my ability. I specifically said that my figure of $70,000 was a guess...what happens if my guess is accurate. I was trying to be honest and as accurate as possible. My job is to make certain that all possible problems that might come up have been given the proper thought process. The building committee thought that my projections were extremely low in my presentation...and I don't really care if you build new or restore.

Displeasure over negative connotations: Well it is a mess...there are indeed piles of debris, rubble and many, many details.

Why isn't there anything positive said about restoration? Has anything happened that is positive? If it has happened, I haven't heard about it. Restoration is going to cost money and so far I have not seen much of that piling up in the bank account. If the bank account now had $200,000 to $300,000 collecting interest, I think that we would seriously look at restoration but there is barely $20,000 there.

Neumann does not know if the structure is restorable. I specifically asked them that at our last meeting and they said that they did not know if the blocks were stable...if the blocks are not stable then restoration is definitely a closed deal. Yes the insurance company is definitely going to settle for the smallest amount possible. Our lawyer is trying to make sure that we are not cheated.

Churches are places where we pray to God in a community setting. However, God listens to us just as well when we pray at home, in the car, at the neighbors house and when we are out walking. Jesus did most of his preaching from hillsides and pastures. As far as I know a new church would be built to our specifications. I have visited a number of churches in the Diocese and around the State and most of them are unique in their structure. The diocesan bureaucrats will not be in charge of our structure, although it will be necessary to be somewhat up to date to meet the need of the new generations that will pay for it.

The reason that All Saints was voted the most beautiful in the Register Survey was that Father announced from the pulpit that the register was running that contest. Our town, and our restaurants also faired well because of this announcement. However All Saints was truly right up there in its beauty.

The True Catholics of All Saints do not need a beacon to know where their faith comes from, there faith is in their hearts and souls and it is just as strong in that old shack that we are using now as it was 6 months ago in the All Saints Church. There is in fact more community in our old shack because of our closeness to each other.

My family has been in the Stuart area since the mid 1940s, and there have been
many happy occasions in those 50 some years, as well as many sad ones. One of
the most devastating things to happen was not to my family, but to the families
of Stuart and the surrounding area last summer in the terrible destruction of the
All Saints Catholic Church. I stood in awe and amazement last August, in the
parking lot of the bank, and watched as a beautiful church building, and a
tremendous landmark, was destroyed by fire. And I, as well as scores of others,
could not imagine, and still cannot imagine, what could possess someone to do
such a thing.

This happened just six short months ago, and life has gone on. There has been
discussion of a new church building, or restoration. I really have no say in
what the people of All Saints do. I do not belong to the church. I must,
although unwillingly, also admit that I never even stepped inside the church.
But, I did admire the beauty of the church building, and have heard about the
immaculate interior, and the furnishings and artifacts that were all a part of,
not only the building, but the very peoples lives who were members, or who were
simply visitors. I have read innumerable letters written since the destruction
of the church, and I understand the deep feelings that everyone has for the All
Saints Church Building. Father Bergman said, after the horrible fire that
destroyed the building, that "The church is not the building, but the church is
the people." And the people have gone on. But the building may not.

I understand that it could be possible to construct a new church including partial
restoration of the old structure, where feasible. I have not asked questions. I
do not have the right. I guess that I always thought that the building would be
rebuilt as close to the original as possible. After all, this has been a
landmark in Stuart since 1908, and so many generations have had the privilege to,
if not be a part of the church, to at least admire the architecture and beauty of
a building that may never be again. This building was one of the things that put
Stuart, Iowa on the map, and to think that it may be no more, and that future
generations may not be able to gaze upon the serenity and beauty of this
magnificent structure, to me seems utterly a devastation in itself.

I also realize that to replace the structure and interior as it was would take an
enormous amount of money over and above what would be realized from an insurance
settlement. But, this is small town America. There are resources right here in
our community. No, there are not many (if any) "wealthy" people, but there are
riches here beyond our own imaginations. There is labor, there is some money,
there are those who wish to help, and most of all, there is the dream that, as a
community, if we really want to have this building restored, that there is some
way it can be done. It won't be quick, and it won't be easy. But I, for one, am
willing to help in any way that I can, and I think that there are probably many
more besides me. One person, or a dozen, or even 50, more than likely cannot
make the difference. But as I have found from personal experience, that a
community, with their help, blessings, prayers, and commitment can make a
tremendous difference.

I have enclosed a check payable to "Rebuild the Church"
for $500.00, and I give this with the knowledge that, no matter how much I or
anyone else may want the building restored, that it may be virtually impossible
to accomplish. If the restoration cannot be done, then use the money toward a
new building, or whatever else you have need for. But please understand. I want
to help, and I will help in any way that I can, and I challenge everyone of the
community, and surrounding communities, and people everywhere that read this
letter, or hear this message, to help in whatever way they can.

One thing I should never have done is retire. I'm busier now than I ever was
when I had an office. Somehow I've stated in our (Wagner's) newsletter of 1995
as the Year of Preservation for both Wagner's & Architectural.

The 28th of February 1970 I made a drawing of the interior of All Saints.
Shortly after I left on a round-the-world trip and another in 1985. Wherever I
have been I've drawn churches -- monuments to faith. The beauty of All Saints
was outstanding and is on my favorite list. Around the world these monuments to
faith have suffered damage -- war and otherwise. They have rebuilt and usually
better after restoration.

In 1958 I walked into a bombed - burnt out hull of one of Wren's churches in
London. In 1965 I walked again into this same church restored in gleaming white
inside and outside at Fulton, Missouri. I also walked into bombed-out ruins of
old Coventry Cathedral - now a memorial chapel - book gift shop and adjoining the
greatest piece of contemporary religious architecture in all England.

I could go on with other examples, but the point I want to make is ONE must think
positive and big if it is worthy. All Saints will rise again! A lot of people
have given money which is in a fund for restoration, which includes Wagner.

I can relate to Father Bergman like no one else. Similar degenerate idiots set
and fired our churches, your All Saints and my Church of the Land at Living
History Farms, after John Paul II was here. I wanted to design the church which
was in the future plans -- I did three plans; the FIRST with roof sheathing on
only blew down. The SECOND was burned down the day before Easter (I think 1983)
and the THIRD as is today. I cried twice. Two or three changes were made
overall -- mostly to simplify floor plan.

With today's technology All Saints older problems can be resolved. You have the
top sincere contractor of Iowa on the job. All Saints is not only important to
Stuart but also to all Iowa and beyond. Somehow this must be gotten out of
Stuart. The back page of the Wagner's newsletter went out to 200 persons around
the world.

In response to a letter to the editor that appeared on January 25,
1996, I would like to address the following issue. Mr. Becker stated, "I
sincerely hope that we will be able to continue to keep the parish informed
without the use of the local paper." His sincerity for keeping the
parish informed about the facts concerning the restoration of our church
are severely questionable.

From the very beginning we were told to be patient and that we would
have time for parishioner participation in the decision making process.
None of these promises were ever fulfilled. On February 15, the parishioners
of All Saints and the Stuart Community were shocked when they heard that
a decision was made to demolish the church. The insensitivity of the parish
leaders to make this announcement to the media without first informing
the parish was consistent with the way they have conducted themselves since
this process began. The church leaders have consistently withheld communication
and deployed misinformation to the parish in regards to all matters of
the restoration process.

On February 15, the same day that the decision was made to demolish
the church, the following information was in the hands of Diocesan Officials,
Parish Leaders, and the Building Committee. This information was in regards
to the first and only meeting open to parishioner participation.

At the meeting of February 8, 1996, with the Enviromental Design
Group, Building Committee and Parish Leaders, the following questions and
concerns were discussed and need further investigation.

SURVEY #1
Why was the survey not mailed to all parishioners. Many are elderly, or
were out of town and many were not present because of poor weather conditions.
The temperature that weekend was approximately -30 to -40 wind chill factor.
It was stated approximately 200 surveys were counted out of 160 parish
families. Many of the people did not understand the survey as it was not
explained to them and they were given approximately 10 minutes to complete
the survey. Then the results of this survey were used as a basis of information
for SURVEY #2. It was stated that 50% response was very good for any survey.
This might be true if we are talking about a survey on buying habits, political
preference, or something in that order. This is not true when we are making
an important decision such as the restoration of the church structure or
the building of new facilities.

It was a concern of many, as to the surveys that were mailed to
Father Bergman and Mark Becker. Were these counted and included in the
results of the survey? The answer to this question was not completely resolved.

Why is there a rush to complete these surveys within a period of
two weeks without input from all parishioners?

For something as important as the future of our parish it is very
hard to digest a two-page survey in 10-15 minutes.

SURVEY #2
It was stated at the meeting that the follow up survey of February 10 was
inappropriate because it consisted of results of the previous survey which
was not representative of the whole parish. Once again it was given to
us at Mass to complete within 5-10 minutes and no consideration was given
to those unable to be present. This survey spoke nothing of restoration
but only of "new" or "integrated facility". The aspect
about the survey being a one-sided promotion for a new facility was brought
up at the meeting but was not addressed sufficiently to explain the motive
of the Building Committee.

COMMUNICATION Another issue that was a major concern, was
the lack of communication between the Building Committee and the parishioners.
It was quite obvious at the meeting that there was anxiety over this issue.
Since the fire that gutted our church, the meeting on February 8, has been
the only meeting that was made open to parishioners. In order for parishioners
to express their opinions on a survey they need adequate information concerning
costs and subject-matter. Instead, they are called upon to fill out surveys
with little information to base their opinions on. The opportunity to attend
Building Committee meetings by parishioners would be very helpful in the
communication process.

In order to make a decision of this importance, the following type
of information needs to be provided.

MISINFORMATION At the weekend Mass of January 6, the parishioners
were given a handout concerning the reconstruction program for the church.
Among other things was the statement that "$480,000.00 has been spent
since Msgr. Ryan came to this parish 20 years ago". "Maintenance
on this building has been high over the years."

Was this statement meant to infer that $480,000.00 was spent for
maintenance on the church? What was the source of these figures and why
were they used to misrepresent the actual cost of maintenance on the church
building since the time of Msgr. Ryan.

An actual figure of $179,820.90 was spent for maintenance completed
on the church during Msgr. Ryan pastorate. This included repairs which
were badly needed for some years.

Once repairs were made on this structure it would be some time in
the future before they would be needed again.

The source for our information is The 1987 Parish Directory. This
report was compiled by Richard Doherty at the request of Msgr. Ryan.

Maintenance on Church Structure
11/75 - 7/87

Date
11/75 Tuckpointing, sandblasting, waterproofing church 22,177.00
7/76 New roofing on church 17,280.00
6/77 Church interior decoration 54,802.00
2/80 New Hall furnace and heating system 12,303.40
4/80 New paneling and ceiling for hall 9,837.00
8/81 New church furnace and hall air-conditioner 16,500.00
6/83 Repairs on 16 church dome windows 5,487.50
8/83 Renovate hall restrooms 8,500.00
4/85 Install protective plate glass on church windows 19,270.00
9/86 Cleaning, waterproofing church exterior and 13,664.00
restoration of east and north entrances ___________
TOTAL $179,820.90

We do realize that there was new roofing applied to the church in 1993
at a cost of approximately $18,000.00. This figure would also be added
to the maintenance costs. The construction of the church ramp would be
considered an improvement and not a maintenance cost.

The important question about the expenditures for maintenance on
the church was not answered by anyone on the Committee.

At the weekend Mass of February 17-18, the parish was informed that
it would have cost as little as $250,000 above the insurance settlement
to renovate the burnt-out structure of our church. Why did we not receive
this information prior to the decision to demolish the structure? What
an act of senseless destruction is being committed against the church of
All Saints and the people of the Stuart community.

The church leaders making the decisions have no heritage in the Stuart community
and when they leave all that will remain is a legacy of destruction.

As a member of the All Saints Church in Stuart for over 50 years, I must voice my
displeasure and disappointment over the recent decision to demolish the
structure. All Saints has stood as a landmark in the Stuart community since
1908. Many in the parish -- I dare say the majority -- have lived their lives,
worshiped, married and buried their loved ones from this church. Perhaps it is
difficult for newcomers to understand or appreciate how very deep the people's
feeling reach where this church is concerned.

We all grieved after the fire in August. Many of us grieve now at the decision
made by a "few" to build a new church without receiving input from those
affected. I believe the majority in the parish and the community want to see the
church restored to its former magnificence.

The people of the parish have not been presented with any bids for restoration.
Surveys were distributed on the Sunday of the coldest week of the year when many
of the elderly could not attend. The surveys were vague and biased toward a new
church. People need facts, not speculation, before decisions can be made.

Donations came in unsolicited after the fire from the general public all over the
state. A decision to restore the church would bring in more donations to help
cover costs above insurance. Many in the community as well as those who were
born and raised here but have since moved on would provide financial support if
needed.

We must save the church and preserve its history and beauty. People should be
given the right to voice their opinions and vote on something that affects not
only the parish but the entire community.

A sad and unnecessary situation is manifesting itself in Stuart, Iowa.

The majority of All Saints parish and the entire community have not been privy to
the decisions that are being made on their behalf.

A building of great religious, cultural, historical and artistic value is going
to be destroyed. Destroyed without pursuing all the avenues available, ie:
challenging the insurance company, seeking expert opinions from all the many
sources available and the offer of FREE consultation on the feasibility of
restoration.

The opinion of the foremost construction company in the state that the building
is restorable was ignored. Also being ignored are the thousands of former
residents and parishioners who love this town and the jewel that sits in its
midst.

Disheartening doesn't begin to describe the feelings of helplessness and betrayal
that many feel.

The decision has been made. The church will come down. I have struggled to
accept its fate; teetering between my emotional desire to have it restored, and
trying to accept the realism that while it may be possible to restore it, is it
practical?

I believe part of the reason for the long delay in announcing the final outcome,
was psychological. The longer the remains of our beloved church stood 'Like a
tombstone in the night,' the more people were determined to have resolution.
Even if it meant tearing it down. Anything was better than seeing it stand in
its present state. Information was delved out bit by bit, all discouraging,
'Neumann's had found soft bricks,' 'money from the insurance company wouldn't
begin to pay for the priceless artifacts.' I feel that the information was
handed out piece by piece in a manner to make the parish feel that they were the
ones making the decision, when in fact, they were being led down the path towards
a decision made months ago.

I'm not disputing these facts, yes, I do believe
there are soft bricks. I heard from more than one source, that several
parishioners stated that knowing about the soft bricks, they weren't sure they
would feel safe entering the church even if it was restored. I had to chuckle at
this. There is NO way the building could earn a Certificate of Occupancy if the
structure was not reconstructed properly. Neumann would ensure that all soft
bricks were replaced.

Those parishioners resigned to the fact that it should be torn down and a new
church built are right in their belief that a new church would prove more
practical; easier to heat, cool, the maintenance would be much lower. Yes, I
agree. I disagree, however, that if it was restored, it would be as energy
deficient as it had been in the past. While it would certainly not be as
efficient as smaller church, measures could be taken that would greatly reduce
its energy consumption. It could be better insulated, ventilation vents could be
placed around the dome (if it was reconstructed) that would keep the air
circulating.

Now, as for the practicality, is it practical to rebuild the church? Many would
say, "no". I admit, it would be expensive, and yes, this money could be spent
elsewhere. But then I remember what a landmark it was ... could be again. How
many landmarks do we have in Iowa? Few. No, we didn't advertise it as such, and
probably few brochures, if any on Iowa mentioned its existence. But it was a
landmark. We all know it. And any of you who have traveled to other states, or
even other countries would have to admit, you would rarely enter a church that
could compare to its majesty. Just last summer, I was in the National Cathedral,
which is the largest Catholic church in the United States, and yes, it is
beautiful, but it didn't have any single stained glass window that compared to
All Saints. It had many chapels, with many different style pews, but none were
as ornate as All Saints. I could go on. I'm sure many of you have your own
comparative stories.

I live in Des Moines, and any of you familiar with the Sherman Hills area of the
city, know that it is filled with turn of the century mansions, many in such bad
state of repair, that they literally sell for a mere few thousand dollars. Of
course, to restore them to their original glory takes several thousand dollars,
but when completed, their value far exceed the cost of restoration. Often, it
would be easier to demolish these houses, and build a new one on the lot. But
what price is it worth to preserve history? Don't you feel that with the proper
campaign, we could generate enough interest in All Saints that could earn the
funding necessary for the complete restoration?

As someone said, "We should look at it as a death in the family." Well, I've
had family members die, and when they are gone, there is no bringing them back,
but All Saints isn't gone. It's still standing. I think it's time for a second
opinion. We've had facts and figures from those leaning toward it destruction,
please allow the same consideration for those who would like to see it restored.
We already have an estimate for the stations of the cross. What parishioner
wouldn't be willing to contribute with pride toward the $14,000 needed?

Yes, I cried when my church was destroyed. Yes, I admit I too often relayed to
people that perhaps its restoration wasn't practical. But it's a landmark. If
our forefathers felt this way about restoration, where would Bill and Hillary
Clinton live today? The White House was rebuilt after it was demolished by fire.
This is true about many old structures in the past. Modern people take the
demolish and rebuild approach instead of restoration, never taking into
consideration the historical value of what they are demolishing.

At one time, I felt that no, we would never again have the majestic altar, the
beautiful paintings, the ornate pews. It's difficult to say as of yet what the
likelihood is that the altar could be replaced or restored, but what budding
artist wouldn't take pride in being our Michaelangelo and doing the artwork at a
reasonable rate? As the pews, perhaps they wouldn't be as ornate as our original
ones, but don't we have enough talented carpenters in the parish or town that
would give us a discounted rate ... taking pride in being able to participate in
its restoration? Remember the "barn raising" days of yesteryear where
neighbors would gather together and build barns, houses, outbuildings for each
other help each other plow and reap their crops. Can't this same enthusiasm ...
neighbor helping neighbor be applied to All Saints? Isn't our beloved old church
a cause worth fighting for? Stuart took pride in it. Catholics and non
Catholics alike.

Yes, it will cost more money to restore it than rebuild. The estimates for the
structure exceed one million dollars. This is a lot of money. But I feel that
it could be earned. I don't know how much support there is in Stuart or in the
parish for a least researching the feasibility of restoring the church. Nor do I
have any idea how many are willing to take the time necessary to help with fund
raising. But I've sat by and waited long enough. It's time to rally together.
All I'm asking, is give us time. Dig out the rubble. Let's see what's
recoverable under all the debris. Once we know the condition of the altar, the
statues, we will have a better idea as to the actual cost of restoration. What
exactly would we be getting if we spent the extra million dollars? A shell? A
completed structure minus the religious artifacts? If these figures include
restoring it as it appeared before, complete with dome, as well as all lights,
heating, kitchen, etc., this is probably not a bad deal. Allow us the time to
campaign for contributions. Not only state wide, but perhaps nationwide. If
every Catholic across the United States pledged $1.00 ...?

Think about it. Let's show all the Doubting Thomas' that working together, we
can move mountains, or more to the point, rebuild our beloved church.

It's really too bad we might lose our really magnificent land marker. I have
looked at a lot of maps that when you would see Stuart that there was a symbol of
All Saints. I guess now we will have to change all the maps and maybe put a
McDonald's sign instead.

The All Saints Church in my opinion is the last truly great land marker we have
left that we still have a chance to save.

The church itself makes a statement of what a great Catholic community this
surrounding area has. They built a church, that today for this parish to build
such a church, would only be a dream. The church today is only damaged not
destroyed, the roof and floor is what was destroyed. That is a very small part
of the church compared to the stone work, with what is still there and in good
shape from what the engineer knows so far. If All Saints was restored today,
with today's technology, it would be maintenance free for 50 years. The roof has
been a big worry since the tile roof came off and shingles were applied. The
roof on All Saints was never designed for asphalt shingles. There were no soffit
vents or roof vents which are essential when asphalt shingles are applied, so air
can flow and help keep the shingles cold and prevent the shingles from getting
too hot.

Neumann's bid for shingling was $35,000.00. If a metal simulated tile roof was
put on instead of asphalt is would cost $60,000.00 and it is guaranteed for 50
years. Within 50 years it would save the church $135,000.00 instead of using
shingles.

In 25 years a lot of money was spent on maintenance and preventative maintenance
as such as the storm windows tuckpointing etc. It's too bad that the parish in
the last 25 years were getting the end of a good deal. By that I mean, All
Saints was built to be as maintenance free as possible for 100 years ago. But
think about it, All Saints went 60 years without any maintenance. Very few
structures built today goes even 20 years. The last church built in this town 20
years ago was shingled this year.

Nobody realizes how much copper was used to protect the roof, fascia boards and
over hangs. I don't know of any metal better than copper that could have been
used 100 years ago and even today. I cannot blame any parish member that has
been helping pay for the church's cost for the last 25 years to have a bad taste
in their mouths for the church maintenance. Heating has been another cost that
has been high, but that's not the church's fault. Think about how the price of
fuel has risen in 25 years. Restored All Saints will be insulated as good as a
new church. The furnace will be a lot more energy efficient, the cost for
heating the church could go down a third or even more. It would be nice to know
what the expected cost to heat a new church before we destroy All Saints.

I feel that a lot of the parish members feel they are alone when it comes to
paying off the debt to restore and "update" . I don't blame them for not
wanting to be responsible for that debt, I don't either. But we are not alone.
There are more people in the Midwest that has ties with the church in one way or
another. The town itself is marked on the map by a symbol of the church. All
Saints is the last true land marker we have left in this area. If put on the
National Register any maintenance that would be needed done in 50 years from now
the church would be eligible for grants that would pay up to 50% of the cost.
Fifty years from now this church would be on the top priority list for funds from
the National Register, believe me.

All Saints is truly the last monument, our forefathers have left, that progress
or neglect has not taken. It's too bad, the fate of All Saints is left to such a
small few when it has touched so many. Why was the survey not sent out to all
parish members?

I do believe there are more people in the parish, in town, and in the state, that
have been just waiting to hear that we were going to rebuild before they would
donate. It is hard to understand how anybody could settle for 3.9 million for a
20-30 million dollar structure.

A sad and unnecessary situation is manifesting itself in Stuart, Iowa.

The majority of the parish and the entire community have not been privy to the
decisions that are being made on their behalf.

A building of great religious, cultural, historical and artistic value is going
to be destroyed. Destroyed without pursuing all the avenues available ie:
challenging the insurance company -- seeking expert opinions from the many
sources available -- ignoring the offer of FREE consultation on the feasibility
of restoration -- specifically, ignoring the opinion of the foremost construction
company in the state, that the building is restorable.

Money is an issue -- Go back to "challenging the insurance company."

Also being ignored are the thousands of former residents and parishioners who
love this town, and the jewel that sits in its midst.

There are so may resources that are not being considered.

Disheartening doesn't begin to describe the feelings of helplessness and betrayal
that many feel.

The person who stated that his goal was to "take the heart out of a small Iowa
town," may have succeeded beyond his wildest expectations.

I have read thousands of words urging restoration of All Saints Church in Stuart.
I have also written and rewritten thousands of words expressing my personal
concern for the preservation of the Church. Summing up these thousands and
thousands of words, there is a need for something other than words. The State
Historical Society recently presented me with the Harland-Peterson Award and the
Iowa Chapter of the American Institute of Architecture presented me their medal
of honor last year. These and others given to me for my preservation efforts for
the last 40 years serve as my pedigree. Now I feel I can call a "spade" by no
other than a "spade," not a "heart." This will be an illustrated letter to
the editor to express my point. Many people today can't read or don't have time
to. Just this morning on the news, educators expressed concern about the
inability of people to read. I have heard that the average number of hours spent
watching TV are 42 per week.

For the thousands of people who have not seen the interior of All Saints Church,
my original drawing was made in 1970 and was presented to Father Bergman the
Saturday after the fire. I said the restoration of All Saints is bigger than
Stuart. It's a statewide project and somehow this NOW historic original drawing
might be of help. I feel the Diocesan officials (the hierarchy) and a few church
members have the right to make decisions affecting a state historic monument.
Webster's Dictionary says of "hierarch" and "hierarchy" that "priests are the
keepers of sacred things." All Saints is a most "sacred thing." Give the
thousand of us who feel All Saints should be restored TIME. Following are three
case histories to illustrate some of our options.

CASE HISTORY #1
I designed the Church of the Land which was constructed on the spot where Pope
John Paul II spoke on his journey to rural America in 1979. This church has had
a fiery history as well. The day before Easter, 1983, some "WILLARD" set fire
to it too. The drawing here shows the blackened, burned-out hulk. It has since
been rebuilt. I gave Father Bergman a copy of this sketch and said, "We can
relate to each other."

CASE HISTORY #2
In 1958, I stood inside a bombed and burned-out hulk, Saint Mary Aldermanbury of
London, England, a Catholic church for 350 years. In 1942, a Nazi bomb destroyed
the church. In 1962, preservation-restoration wheels were put into motion which
resulted in the taking apart of the structure stone-by-stone and the
reconstructing of it on The Campus of West Minster College in Fulton, Missouri.
In 1965, I again stood in the interior of the now gleaming white church.

CASE HISTORY #3
If restoration is possible, think seriously of case history number THREE. You
could have a historic ruins joined by a new and beautiful edifice, such as
Coventry Cathedral, another bombed and burned-out hulk. Old Coventry, is used as
an Outdoor Chapel and Book/Gift Shop. It is the greatest modern Cathedral in
England. I have mixed emotions now. Much of All Saints is gone like Saint
Mary's--much can be restored and some maybe not ever.

My files are crowded with monuments to faith that have "WILLARDS" involved.
There have been "JOHNS" who stand up and do what they believe is right.
Brother Gus, a monk at New Melleray Abbey near Dubuque, Iowa, over the years,
filled a notebook with "sacred quotes." His friends got a hold of this notebook
and produced gems (semi-precious) which "reflect his spirit of love and
humility." I've read and reread these and I have so many favorites. But one
gem stands out in regard to All Saints Church for those who want to save it.
"The Greatest Calamity is not to have failed but to have failed to try!"

To sum up, please, hierarchy: put together a committee of those in favor of
either side of the issue to hear and evaluate all options and alternatives.

The above case histories have been tested by fire and have come out stronger than
EVER.

This is an appeal to stop the plans for demolition of the All Saints Church. It
is not a building, it's a "beacon in the sky," a challenge we have met for 87
years, an obligation passed on to each generation by the people who built it.
People with courage, foresight and vision. People who met their OWN challenge --
financing, planning, construction, and creating a work of art at a time when
horses, ropes, and pulleys were the only tools of construction. Who set their
limits? Who determined that it was possible to import all the beautiful stained
glass and marble? Who crafted the copper dome? And how did they get it up
there? These are the kind of people we need to be!

How many of our grandfathers worked on the church, as masons, painters and
plasterers? How many brought their teams of horses to town to work? The
physical construction that we are expected to do, will be very limited; our task,
instead, is to finance it. Our financial resources in this parish are small, the
only resource we possess are ourselves -- the PEOPLE. You may think you cannot
contribute, but you are wrong. If you are not an attorney, salesman, public-
relation representative or advertising executive, you may know one. If you or
your sons and daughters are employed by a large company, it may be one of the
thousands of companies in this country that have established grants and
endowments annually. If you can write letters and stuff envelopes, you are
needed. If you can make a pledge, no matter how small, you are needed. If you
can pray every day to St. Jude and St. Rita, patron saints of the impossible, you
are needed.

This is our opportunity to better ourselves. Was Charles Willard's
senseless act the beginning of the end for stately refuge? Or will it be an
wakening? -- Don't let the size of the commitment overwhelm you, "Every journey
begins with a single step!" If the statement in the press release "the damaged
structure will be razed as soon as is practical" sickens you, or if the last six
months you have restoration TELL someone, or shout it from the roof tops, or be
"the mouse that roared!" Charles Willard did not destroy the structure of our
church, he damaged it. Ultimately, we will be responsible for destroying it, if
we remain SILENT.

The torch has been passed on to us, the challenge is greater than we had
anticipated, will we fail in our appointment as caretakers, or will we ignite an
even greater fire within us and restore our "beacon in the sky?"

The summer of 1995 will long be remembered as a "sad and eerie" night when the
beautiful, majestic All Saints Catholic Church was nearly destroyed by fire at
the hands of an unthinking man. For many hours the flames loomed in the sunset
and the cross stood gallantly atop the structure as if to say, "I will not give
up or be destroyed." Maybe all in the area should accept this as a challenge
and help restore and preserve the historical marker Stuart was and still is
partially blessed with.

"If there is a will, there is a way." Religion today has no boundaries and
crosses all lines. All the churches regardless of denomination share in World
Day of Prayer, Good Friday Services, plus several other special days and
activities.

In my opinion it would be great if the whole community could "Rally around the
Cross." It may be time to set goals to contact all previous Stuart residents
who have grown up and left town, contact many large businesses who the citizens
of Stuart have and still do support in many ways, and come up with a committee
who would be in charge of a "brain storming" session that would seek out ways
to "raise the amount of money needed for Restoration." Basically this is a
decision for the Catholic Church. I only suggest the community would like to
help.

I realize from selling insurance for many years if you have "Replacement Cost
Insurance" and you are insured for 80% of value, the company is obligated to
replace a like structure. I also realize a "Marine Policy" was needed to cover
the statues, stained glass windows, altar and other extra value items. These
items which apparently weren't covered could be replaced over time with
"Memorial Money," family gifts, etc.

When the Jefferson Center Church south and west of Stuart burned many years ago,
it was replaced with a lovely brick structure (previous one was wood) and the
different families and individuals donated stain glass windows for the complete
sanctuary of the church, plus other needed items.

Let's let the whole world know, "anything is possible with God's Help." The
only true and genuine hope in all the universe rests not in our own efforts,
resources, or circumstances, but in God alone.

Let me add my voice of support to the many residents of Stuart who are protesting
the decision not to restore their beautiful and historic All Saints Catholic
Church, torched by a hate-filled fanatic.

If the church is not restored, the only one who will win is the convicted but
unrepentant arsonist. We must not let that happen.

We, the entire community of central Iowa, easily have the means to finance the
added cost of restoration over building a new church if we have the will. Our
community rallied when the Jewish Temple was desecrated, and would do so again if
called upon.

The All Saints parishioners may be a few miles down the road from downtown Des
Moines, but they're still our neighbors.

I propose that the All Saints parish postpone a final decision and allow its many
friends in the Des Moines metro area the time to raise the money to restore the
church and strike a victory for toleration and good will.

We need a Des Moines-based volunteer organization assembled with the cooperation
of the Des Moines Area Religious Council and the business leadership of Des
Moines with the know-how to get things done.

Every four years the national media invade Iowa to report on the Iowa caucuses
and invariably describe Iowans as decent, hardworking exemplars for the rest of
America. Let's live up to our image and really give them something to write
about.

Catholic, Protestant, Jewish or however we describe ourselves, in a paradoxical
way one mad act has afforded us an opportunity to re-animate our sense of
community and truly say that we are all saints of this church.

I am writing in response to Joan Gayle Glenn's Letter to The Stuart Herald last
week.

Recently I watched a television program on renovations in Charleston, South
Carolina. There were dozens of buildings 100 years old and older that were only
partial shells of their original selves. The majority of these buildings
appeared to be in worse shape than All Saints is now. It would have been many
times easier and cheaper just to tear these structures down, but alas!, the
community banded together and used their own blood, sweat and tears to re-build.
The before and after pictures were incredible! And it was all because the heart
of the community, the people, chose to restore the old neighborhood to its
original beauty. They refused to give in and refused to give up, through
tremendous opposition.

I am not a member of the Catholic Church, but I definitely would, as Joan Gayle
suggested, stuff envelopes, give a small donation, write letters, help with any
fund raising in any way I could. I think the diocese might be pleasantly
surprised as to how many Stuart residents would be willing to add OUR labor of
love to restore a beautiful landmark and holy place of worship! The sorrow I
feel every morning when I get up and look out my bedroom window at the church
fills me with strength and determination to help in any way I can to restore its
beauty.

Why should any of us in the community settle for destruction when there are so
many folks willing to help? Am I wrong here? It seems to me that there a whole
lot of non-Catholics eager to assist you in your cause. Has everyone really
thought deeply about what our community is giving UP if we give IN? We ALL need
to let our voices be heard.

I have read all the letters to the editor and have looked at it from all the
angles I am aware of. I know it will be costly, and I know that it would seem
practical to some to raze it and build a more modern structure. I'll bet 90
years ago there were cynics opposing the building of All Saints, too, but look
what the people of this community did then!!! As Dorothy Varley pointed out in
her letter, religion crosses all lines and knows no boundaries!

As a Roman Catholic priest and archivist, I am writing to support Richard Doherty and the Project Restore group in their efforts to restore the All Saints Church.

If the old church is destroyed and a new one built in its place, the result will be just another Pizza Hut style church. The uniqueness and beauty of the restored church would be a monument to the religious traditions of those who first built it. Future generations will bless them.

Too often I have observed cases in which a pastor "remodeled" an older church or built a new and then moved on, leaving the parishioners with a bland meeting hall in which to worship.

It was with great sadness that I learned of the torching of All Saints Church. It is hard to believe that one misguided soul could cause all the grief and sorrow engendered by this one deplorable act.

I am not Catholic but I had a deep and abiding love for that structure so maliciously burned. I grew up in Stuart and went with my good friend Anna Mae Muldoon to attend services there on occasion. I suspect the Muldoons are all gone now but I remember them as good devout people, devoted to their church.

I graduated from Stuart in 1936. Left there and returned for a brief time during and following World War II. My husband, John Dietrich, was employed at First State Bank after the war and was born and reared in Menlo.

There were two things that characterized Stuart for me. One was the handsome old town clock and the other, the magnificent All Saints Church.

Please accept this $100 donation to help restore the church to its former glory.

As a Catholic priest and archivist, I am writing to support Richard Doherty and the Project Restore group in their efforts to restore the All Saints Church in Stuart.

If the old church is destroyed and a new one built in its place, the result will be just another Pizza Hut-style church. The uniqueness and beauty of the restored church would be a monument to the religious traditions of those who first built it. Future generations will bless them.

Too often I have observed pastors "remodel" an older church or build anew and then move on, leaving the parishioners with a bland meeting hall in which to worship.

The scene is Stuart, Iowa in the summer of 1995, less than 10 miles from Madison
County.

The buildings in downtown Stuart are from another time. They were constructed
just after the turn of the century to support a booming railroad town of 3,000
people. The railroad has long since left. Many of the buildings appear to be
abandoned. There are now 1,520 residents in the community.

The school house is run down, the product of a 30-year taxpayers' rebellion.
There is no industry. Many of the streets are not paved. There are few high
paying jobs. There is poverty and ignorance and little hope for change.

On many important issues, the town is managed by people who live outside the city
limits. They use fear, intimidation, political connections and money to maintain
their power. What's good for them is good for the town.

People who try to make improvements have slim support and are shouted down like
dogs from a garbage dump. Good people, who could lend assistance and support
shimmer behind closed doors, afraid of repercussions. Is this not the model for
great western drama?

There is a jewel in this community. A shining green orb which beacons travelers
from Interstate 80, located only a mile away. It is a weather stained, copper
domed Catholic Church, built in 1908.

Who could believe that a structure so magnificent would be built in this town?
People who are well informed say the edifice, while not on the scale of the great
churches in Europe, is as artfully assembled. A Byzantine gem in the midst of a
cultural desert.

In truth, except for some paintings by a local artist displayed in two
restaurants, the church houses the only public art in town. Not to leave out the
local students' annual art shows, of course.

Inside the church are beautiful marble altars trimmed in gold, breathtaking works
of religious art painstakingly maintained by a devoted congregation. People
familiar with the inner workings of churches are amazed that the elderly priests
who have managed this parish are able to convince the parishioners to keep
tithing.

Most people are just astounded by the beauty, unaware of the sacrifices made by
the givers.

There is the art, the beauty, the building and there is the religion. The
religion has guided many generations of families who have raised their children
in the Catholic faith, devoted to their God and their way of life.

These people have been forced to choose between the beauty of the building and
the practical reality of running a parish.

On August 22, 1995 a twisted little man started a fire in the church and the
building was nearly destroyed. "The building" (was destroyed), said the local
priest, "not the church."

The fire, according to the twisted little man, was meant to draw attention to his
patchwork philosophy of life and a celebration of his own coming out as a
homosexual. Christ was a homosexual, he said, and just a man. He claimed the
church, with its sterile art and aversion to homosexuals, is a thing of the past.
He burned the church on his own birthday to mark the beginning of the end of
Christianity.

There was a trial. The little man received more than his 15 minutes of fame. He
was found guilty of two counts of arson and sentenced to 50 years in prison.

Meanwhile the parish is left with a decision. There are four million dollars in
insurance money. There are two things about the money.

1. It is more money than most of these people have ever seen and it is causing
the kinds of problems that a large sum of money usually causes. There are
squabbles over how the money should be spent.

2. It is not enough to restore the church. No one knows how much it will take
to build a church like the old one. Maybe eight million dollars.

There is enough money to build a nice new church. The leaders of the parish have
already made that decision. They have made the right decision, the practical
decision, the decision that emphasizes the religion, not the building, the art
over the day to day reality of running a church in a rural, low income area.
Their decision not to restore the old church will stand the test of time, given
the present circumstances.

From where would the millions of dollars to restore the old church come? There
are a lot of people who say they will help. They do not have the ability to
raise anything like four million dollars. How would the newly restored church be
maintained? Is it fair to saddle future generations with an artful dinosaur?

There is a group of Don Quixotes in this community who are trying to turn the
decision around. They need a miracle.

Maybe you could be that miracle. A movie, some money, a legend is born.

A modern day miracle-maker defeats the anti-Christ, creates a legend and further
contributes to tourism in the area, thereby providing future maintenance costs
for the new church.

This town looks as run down as any in your spaghetti westerns. We have some
stray dogs to turn loose while you are filming. The characters could be made to
be interesting. We already have plenty of characters in our community. If you
want to play the villain in the movie, we will understand. You could be the hero
in real life.

I have been a member of All Saints all of my life. All Saints was and still can
be a beautiful gem in the town of Stuart, Iowa.

Please don't sit back thinking you don't matter and you can't make a difference.
I know that one person can make a difference and one person can make an impact.
Your opinion matters. You should do what your heart tells you to do; the right
thing. I'm sure you, one person in a flock, can make the right decision.
Everyone has the right to their own opinion. I made the decision about what I
thought without the help of my parents. Don't be afraid to voice it. SPEAK OUT!

Project Restore appreciates donations of money, pledges of money, and pledges of
working hours. People of any age can donate to Project Restore. I donated a
small amount of money to Project Restore, and I'm only eleven years old. I
donated it because I believe it's a worthy cause.

Please come to the Project Restore town meeting at the Legion Hall (skating rink)
in Stuart on Thursday night at 7:00, and get informed.

I read Alan Taylor's April 11 editorial twice and couldn't decide if I should be
insulted or not, but it did make me laugh. I hope Clint Eastwood rides to the
rescue, but just in case he doesn't, I would like to encourage you to attend
Project Restore's town meeting Thursday evening, April 18 at the Stuart Rec
Center, 7:00 p.m.

I will be there along with most of my family. I have unanswered questions and
want to see the restoration issue pursued, investigated and presented.

It will be a well organized program and you will hear from an architect,
structural engineer, someone involved with restoring Clarinda's court house and
more.

The term "restoration" has not been fully explained to me. A total restoration
may not be possible. I personally want to see the remaining structure saved and
restored. An alternative that addresses both issues in a compromise would be
using the existing shell and building a new interior. A structural engineer says
just that could be accomplished and at a cost close to our insurance settlement.

The bishop has stated it is up to the parish to decide; if this is true then no
one should be intimidated about attending this meeting and displeasing the
Diocese. Freedom of assembly is an American privilege I intend to exercise.

The are fundamental changes at core of modernization that many parishioners are
not aware of. Become informed.

As a parishioner with family I appreciate the council members who felt they could
not vote to place debt upon our young people. Thank you but I feel it is time
for a commitment on my part. A sacrifice wouldn't hurt me, it might even be good
for me. It would have to do with responsibility. Those unable to give
monetarily can contribute in other ways; you are valuable and your opinions matter
greatly.

My hope for this meeting is to build a bridge. Please do not let the question,
"Could we have restored our church?" go unanswered.

We would like very much to express our sincere thanks to the parishioners of All
Saints and the residents of Stuart and the surrounding area, for attending our
informational meeting last Thursday evening.

We are extremely grateful to the Parish Council members and the Parish Corporation members, who were able to attend. And most especially we wish to thank the panel of experts who voluntarily offered their expertise, free of charge, as well as their time.

Bill Wagner: Iowa's most renowned architect, responsible for such projects as - Terrace Hill (Governor's mansion), Church of the Land (Living History Farms), and our own local 'Town clock' - Masonic Temple Building (Wilbur and Elaine Bump).

Don Staley: Engineer with Reigstad and Associates, Inc. Staley was with the Des Moines Water Works during the flood of '93', where he was responsible for supervision of construction inspection personnel and design of facility projects. He participated in recovery planning and led the facility recovery program. The Water Works recovery efforts have been applauded nationally by experts.

Judy Clark: The Page County auditor, and contact person for the insurance companies, architects, and contractors during the restoration of the Page County Courthouse, which was nearly destroyed by fire in 1991.

Miya Korbelik: Grantwriter and development officer for Iowa Wesleyan College in Mt. Pleasant. Miya unfortunately was unable to attend the meeting, but has offered her talents and experience with confidence for success.

It is wonderful to know we have such caring and giving people supporting the parish of All Saints as we pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and work to regain what might be lost without the unity and cooperation of all who love her, our cherished All Saints Roman Catholic Church.

It has become evident the EGO is a far greater threat to the All Saints Church in Stuart than money needed for restoration. It is a sad day when church leaders, according to news coverage of a town meeting on April 18, "turn a deaf ear to arguments that it should be rebuilt rather than replaced." Great leaders are open to ideas, facts, recommendations and are big enough to consider alternatives and even change their minds when situations warrant.

The Project Restore effort to save the church is receiving donations. A survey conducted by an independent accounting firm in Des Moines showed that almost 60% of the parish were in favor of restoring the church. I commend these people for their faith, love and belief that this magnificent historical landmark can survive and overcome the Charles Willards of this world. Great things and often seemingly impossible feats are accomplished if people believe, care, and remain open-minded.

The Stuart community believes the church can be restored. A civil engineer with Reigstad and Associates Inc. confirmed that the $3.9 million insurance would be adequate to restore the church. This should be investigated further - not shrugged off by closed-minded, small people with more ego than reason.

Imagine the hardships undertaken by the people who built this church in the early 1900s. They had vision, faith and love - not the modern technology available to us today. They left a legacy for those to follow. Are we going to allow the destruction of this legacy by those who have no vision of commitment to such an important part of the parish and community?

The argument that even if the church could be restored, they could not afford upkeep is ludicrous. The parish has maintained that church for 90 years. A restored church would be more energy efficient with better insulation, furnance, air conditioning and ventilation. It would be many, many years before any major upkeep would be required.

I ask, "where is the voice of reason?" How can church leaders "turn a deaf ear" and remain set on a course that will be as great a tragedy as the fire itself. Please be reasonable, be loving, find the vision and be big enough to admit that, maybe, you were premature in making the decision to demolish All Saints. To reiterate what was so aptly stated in a prior letter to the editor by Rev. Loras C. Otting of Dubuque, destroying the church and building new will result in another Pizza Hut style church leaving parishioners with a bland meeting hall in which to worship long after the pastor has moved on.

Project Restore is the effort to save the church. Donations are being solicited with the stipulation that moneys will be returned to the donor if the effort fails. Although I am not a member of the Project Restore group, I hope that people with faith, love and vision will consider a donation. The stone walls of the church still stand after the fire. Will we allow the sin of pride to ultimately bring them down?

I attended the Project Restore group's informational meeting April 18, and I
would like to respond to a question I overheard during a break. Someone wondered
to a friend why people who elected the members of the All Saints parish council
were now not willing to accept their decision to raze the church and put up a new
building. That's a good question! After all, these people have volunteered
their time and efforts to do a job that few others wanted until the fire. If any
members of the parish council or building committee feel unappreciated, they
should not.

But the issue is not that anyone questions the conscientiousness of the council
members. At issue is the fear that these people were put in the position of
being expected to make an informed decision without benefit of adequate
information: that time constraints and an apparent breakdown of communication
may have restricted their ability to research some options that might otherwise
have been considered.

The good news is that it appears some of the problems originally anticipated may
not be problems after all. As it turns out, part of 'what can be salvaged'
from the old building might just be the structure itself. The crack, upon closer
inspection, may not be fire related or significant, and the possibility exists
that the money from the insurance settlement might be adequate to rebuild the
inside of the church using materials and equipment that would mean a very
noticeable reduction in the cost of maintaining the building. More good news:
several experts volunteered early-on to address the council and answer questions
- a golden opportunity that needn't have been missed. Now that council members
are aware of this resource, they might find the offer sill open.

I served for three years on the Diocesan Board of Education, and I learned that
when an emotional issue is raised, the volume of mail and number of complaints
can be staggering. It is part of the job and I can sympathize with anyone in
that position. Another thing I learned is that if a decision is made that later
seems inappropriate due to a change in circumstances or because new information
has come to light, that decision can be reviewed, re-evaluated, and, if
necessary, reversed. That too, is part of the job.

While no one is suggesting that our problem is of the same caliber as that of
disease or world hunger, it is important too. It is important for several
reason, the main one being that parishioners, the council and committee members,
and our friends in the community all deserve to feel that all avenues were
explored before action was taken in this matter. Please, council members,
discuss further, and if your decision is still that this parish would be best
served by scrapping the old building, then everyone could focus their energy and
enthusiasm on plans for the new building. If the decision is changed, we can all
look forward to a return to the church that has been loved and admired in Stuart
for longer than we have lived. In any case, your efforts and consideration would
be much appreciated and, I think, put many concerns to rest.

Woe's me. Reading The Stuart Herald's editorial page is a weekly adventure in
emotional highs and lows. I've followed the editorials, received two phone calls
and read a plea in The 5 x 80 Bulletin. I've stayed outside the fray because
Stuart is 11 miles from my home and I haven't been a member of All Saints for
many years. During one of the phone calls I received I asked about the caller's
daughter. I did so because the person's daughter was supportive of me and my
'churchly efforts' in a neighboring parish. A support I truly appreciated. In
the sense of giving back what I've received, I feel an incompleteness and an
absence of faith and love in not being able to support this person in the quest
to restore.

Unfortunately, as I look at the pros and cons espoused by both sides - and I
believe both sides have pros and cons, I cannot support one side of this issue
against the other. I cannot divide this community any more than it is.

I am angered, however, by the method of decision making. And by the idea that
the decision is irrevocable. If anyone, priest or parish council member, were to
be a true hero in this parish and in this community, she/he would publicly
acknowledge the divisiveness of the decision made last January/February, open the
discussion within the entire parish, encourage the council to vacate the previous
decision and begin anew. Insurance decision not withstanding, there is time for
more discussion and for consensus building within the entire parish community and
not just within the parish council and not just within a part of the parish
family. The building of a new church does not have to begin this summer of this
year and restoration of the old can happen any time. I am saddened that the
church hides behind a parish council, allows those individuals to take the
'heat' and refuses to step forward and assume a Catholic posture by inviting
the discussion to renew the face of the earth.

I'm not familiar with the Doud family; so, I'm assuming that Theresa (Doud)
Powell and John P. Doud are brother and sister. Theresa Powell and John Doud
submitted editorials to The Stuart Herald, which were published in last week's
paper. Reading that they are on somewhat opposite sides of the fence, I'm
pleased to note John Doud's summation when he indicates that when all is said and
done," (As a family,) thankfully we realize that no matter what happens, some
things are more important than a mere building." Although I can quarrel with
the word "mere", the sentiment is one we all embrace.

Let's hope that this can be said of the All Saint's family. Unfortunately, it
won't be something we can say unless steps are taken now to bridge the
differences and to bring people together.

I am writing this letter to inform you, that your presence will probably not be
needed here in Good Eggville. As we all know, our ever talented editor of the
local Stuart Herald, invited you to come and perform miracles and movies.

Let me refresh your covered bridge memory.

As you know, Clint, on August 22, 1995 Charles Willard performed an act of
terrorism by torching All Saints Church. This was an act of insanity, that he
had planned since 1989. He publicly admitted that his action was a special gift
to himself, as a way to remember his 60th birthday. Willard also thought he
needed to destroy the entire catholic religion by burning one church.

Stuart is not only know for the beauty of All Saints Church, but for possessing
1600 good eggs and a few stinkers (citizens). Charles Willard burned the church,
and succeeded in splitting our town, cracking our shell of security. Now we are
known as a town of Good Eggs, Stinkers, Saints and Outsiders. I wonder where you
would fit in with this molting group of flying angels.

The stench of smoke still permeates the air as frustrations and tempers flare
concerning the monumental decision; should the church building be restored, razed
or replaced with a metal building at a different location?

The Catholic Diocese, which could be considered saints or stinkers, made a
decision to abandon the current structure and rebuild a new facility on a
location away from the center of the community. This stinky thinking raised a
lot of fumes, as it was presented to a few good eggs on the coldest day of
winter. The carton of eggs was misrepresented and plans to spend the insurance
money began to dominate the minds of a dozen people.

Not to be over-done, a few other good eggs enlisted help of outsiders. The
outsiders, are those which are not Catholic, Christian, or part of the community,
these people began pouring money into the nest egg, thus adding fuel to the egg
whites who refuse to move from the center of town. Restoration of the church is
the center for some local yokels.

Nourishing thoughts continue to scramble as architects, engineers and artists,
have been invited into the hen house. Each person assaying the possibility for a
new church inside the old facade. Unlike Humpty-Dumpty, the crack can be fixed
and All Saints can be restored.

What joy shall fill the hearts and minds of the community, when All Saints is
restored, rebuilt, old and new together on the some little green acre in the
center of town. Then we shall have all of our eggs (good eggs and stinkers) as
well as outsiders in one basket.

I have thought about writing this for a long time, but put it off because I was
apprehensive about writing a letter to the editor. The article in the April 9,
1996 Des Moines Register was the impetus I needed. The article was entitled
"Church Arsonist Willard Sent to Prison for 50 Years."

The part of the article that upset me was the comments made by Herb Dols,
President of All Saints Parish Council. His comments were made in reference to
the people who are in favor of restoring All Saints and opposed to the present
plan of building a new church. The comments were "the vast majority will come
around." What about the minority? How will you Mr. Dols help them to heal.
Also, "basically they are good people." What does this mean? Does it mean
there is a chance my mother who is in favor of restoration is a "bad" person.
With all this in mind here goes the original written and rewritten letter.

I grew up on a farm 3.5 miles north of Stuart. I attended St. Mary's Catholic
School and spent many mornings during kindergarten through eighth grade attending
daily mass at All Saints Church. My parents were married at All Saints almost 56
years ago. I along with my four brothers and two sisters were baptized and
confirmed there and four of us celebrated marriage there.

On Tuesday, August 22, I called my mother. She said she couldn't talk because my
brother had just come over and said the church was on fire. Right! A big stone
church like All Saints burn? Not possible! Even if there was a fire, it would
be small, contained and easily put out.

But that was not the case. I still remember going to Stuart that evening and
standing south of the church watching it burn. I can feel the pain when I saw
the flames destroy the beautiful dome.

Part of me died that night. The building was gone but the spirit remained, that
was my saving grace. The spirit would never die. I can close my eyes and still
feel the smoothness of the varnished wood of the pews and see the marble pelicans
perched on top of the main altar.

Then came the discussion on whether it was possible or feasible to restore the
church or build a new one. Then suddenly the decision was made. The parish
council had made the decision based on a survey of church members. I was
devastated when I heard it. I'm not a member of All Saints, but that church is
more a part of me than I can say. I had hoped they would restore it. I prayed
that they would.

The decision caused a rift in the parish. It is so sad what destruction,
physical and mental, one man (Charles Willard) can wreak.

Almost everyone in the parish has had their say on the issue, but there's one
person who hasn't had the opportunity to voice his opinion.

My father, Marvin Pieper, is currently in the Stuart nursing home. He suffers
from Alzheimer's disease. He hasn't known any of us except maybe my mother for a
long time. He just celebrated his 80th birthday and I want his gift from me to
be to tell everyone how he would feel about the issue.

It may sound presumptuous to feel I can speak for my dad, but I act a lot like
him. The majority of my life my mother has most affectionately referred to me as
"Miss Marvin." With that in mind, here it goes.

If my dad were of sound mind and body he would never ever allow a new church to
be built. Perhaps I should preface this by saying he would never allow a new
church to be built unless every avenue for and or against restoration had been
exhausted. I know this as I know myself. My dad loved All Saints church; he
loved the community of Stuart and I didn't want him to be left out. I am not
writing this to change anything. I just needed to say "Happy Birthday, Dad."

Recently, we asked readers to submit suggestions for Iowa fixtures that should be
preserved as artifacts for future Iowans to get a feel for Iowa life in the past.
"Iowa Icons" we called them, and we suggested, for starters, such things as Albert
the Bull in Audubon, a Harvestore silo and an Iowa Interstate rest area.

Besides the letter excerpted below, we received suggestions for saving: a family
farm; a Lustron (all-steel) home; a milk truck; an underground coal mine; an A&W
Drive-In; a drive-in movie theater; a piece of the original Lincoln Highway; the
Sutliff Bridge (a one-lane steel structure with wooden-plank deck crossing the
Cedar River built in 1897); and the Tastee Freeze in DeWitt.

Here are other readers' thoughts on Iowa Icons:

(NOTE: There were other letters submitted but the following was the only one
concerning All Saints.)

Pink flamingos, Albert the Bull, McDonald's? Come on, let's get real.

In response to the editorial of Aug. 4, "Fixtures of Everyday Life," All
Saints Church of Stuart is more than worthy as a fixture of everyday life for
blessings and spiritual security so vital for future generations.

This icon was the victim of a pyromaniac on Aug. 22, 1995.

The limestone walls still stand as a reminder that God's church can endure the
test of time.

All Saints Church needs to be restored and preserved for spiritual and historical
values.

So, the community of Stuart has saved a building. Writing in reference of the
Legion/Rec. Center, having raised the $25,000.00 plus to accomplish this benefit;
and many have donated to the Family Youth Center. My family and I have
contributed financially to both worthy causes for the future of the city and its
inhabitants.

Why should we care what happens concerning the good of Stuart,
since we were neither born or raised here but choose to reside in this area; Why,
because we will have grandchildren that will be living here, and possibly be
influenced hopefully in a positive way by many of the fine people of this
community.

Now, let me get to the real point of this letter. If we all or most of us in
Stuart and surrounding areas are in full support of the projects as stated above,
then how much more interest and financial support can we give to Project Restore?
Let's not forget the object of real beauty and cultural interest as well as
spiritual heritage that Stuart is known for.

The Diocese says that no decisions for the building will be made for two years,
but unless we as a community fail to support the on-going project of restoring
the burned out building for historical purposes, then we will be neglecting our
responsibility. We will become infidels.

The Diocese and the committee want a new building for Stuart; that's fine, but get a
new bell and leave the old one with the burned out shell.

The Diocese and committee want to take out the corner stone and build upon the
rock as a memorial foundation in remembrance of the old church.

The Diocese and the committee want to make gravel pathways out of the limestone
walls. Let them pay for their own gravel and leave the walls of the original All
Saints Church standing.

What has the community of Stuart done to the Diocese that has allowed so much
confusion and heartache to come between us. The burned out building belongs to
non-Catholic community as much as it does to any organized religion.

Call the Project Restore hot line at 830-1830 and keep informed. It will be your
money that restores the memories and preserves the future of Stuart for our
families.

Why is the community of Stuart different than the tiny Shelby County community of
Westphalia, whose people stand behind the historical church building of St.
Boniface and keep it alive and living for the generations to come.

Like the legendary Phoenix that resurrects itself, All Saints can be restored and
reborn.